ALI to sell Lytle Place property for $4 million, relocate to Mount Auburn

It's over. Big guys, you won.

Western & Southern in a press release today announced an agreement with Cincinnati Union Bethel (CUB) that will sell the Anna Louise Inn in Lytle Park to W&S for $4 million, ending years of entanglements between the two entities over what should be done with the property in need of millions of dollars in renovations.

As part of the deal, ALI will move to a new
location in Mount Auburn at the corner of Reading Road and Kinsey
Avenue, in the same vicinity as the United Way of Greater Cincinnati and The
Talbert House. The settlement also provides CUB time to construct the
new Inn, so none of the current residents will be displaced. CUB will still retain its $13 million in funding to develop the new property.

The Anna Louise Inn, which provides safe and affordable housing for low-income women, has called the Lytle Park location home since 1909. The new agreement will dissolve all ongoing litigation; most recently, W&S accused ALI of potentially discriminating against men.

In 2009, W&S passed up on an opportunity
to purchase the Inn for $3 million, before CUB obtained city- and state-distributed federal funding to renovate the building and stay in
the neighborhood, a decision Western & Southern admitted it regretted. Since then, the Fortune 500 company has been battling with the ALI in hopes of getting another chance to purchase the property.

According to the CUB website, the settlement came about for several reasons, including concern that ongoing litigation with W&S would have caused it to lose tax credits earned through the Ohio Housing Finance Agency, which were due to expire at the end of 2013 and cannot be used during ongoing litigation.

Now W&S plans to renovate the building
into an upscale new hotel, which will essentially give the company a
monopoly on real estate in the Lytle Park neighborhood.

It's a bittersweet change for the women and staff at the Inn, explains CUB President and CEO Steve MacConnell, but "ultimately, it's the right decision," he says. MacConnell says CUB learned about the plot of land just three to four weeks ago, when they started seriously considering a move. "After two years of litigation, the women — and us — we were all feeling so much uncertainty," he says, "and ultimately what's best for the women is what we've always had in mind."

A new Census Bureau report reveals that from 2005 to 2009, a segment of Over-the-Rhine had the highest income inequality of more than 61,000 communities nationwide.

The segment — known as Census Tract No. 17 — is the northeast quadrant of Over-the-Rhine. The findings were featured in an article Tuesday by McClatchy Newspapers, which attributes the disparity in the tract partially to gentrification and the influx of young professionals into the predominantly low-income neighborhood.

Federal grants tied to streetcar, transit projects

The MLK/I-71 Interchange project is supposed to be funded through the city’s parking plan, but mayoral candidate John Cranley, who opposes the parking plan and streetcar, says the city should instead use federal funding that was originally intended for the streetcar project.

Between 2010 and 2011, the streetcar project was awarded about $40 million in federal grants — nearly $25 million through
the Urban Circulator Grant, $4 million through the Congestion Mitigation
and Air Quality (CMAQ) Grant and nearly $11 million through TIGER 3.

The grants are highly competitive and allocated to certain
projects. In the case of Cincinnati, the grants were specifically
awarded to the streetcar after it was thoroughly vetted as a transit, not highway, project.

The CMAQ Grant’s main goal is to fund projects that
curtail congestion and pollution, with an emphasis on transit projects,
according to the Federal Highway Administration.
The website explains, “Eligible activities include transit
improvements, travel demand management strategies, traffic flow
improvements and public fleet conversions to cleaner fuels, among
others.”

The DOT website says TIGER 3 money could go to a highway project,
but one of the program’s goals is promoting “livability,” which is
defined as, “Fostering livable communities through place-based policies
and investments that increase transportation choices and access to
transportation services for people in communities across the United
States.” TIGER 3 is also described as highly competitive by the DOT, so only a few programs get a chance at the money.

When asked about the grants’ limitations, Cranley said, “I
believe … the speaker of the house, the senator, the congressman, the
governor and the mayor could petition and get that changed. Just because
that may have been the way they set the grants in the first place
doesn’t mean they can’t change it.”

The parking plan would lease Cincinnati’s parking assets to the Port of Greater Cincinnati Development Authority and allocate a portion of the raised funds — $20 million — to the MLK/I-71 Interchange project, but the plan is currently being held up by a lawsuit seeking to enable a referendum.

The streetcar is one of the few issues in which Cranley
and Vice Mayor Roxanne Qualls, a streetcar supporter who is also running for mayor, are in stark contrast (“Back on the Ballot,” issue of Jan. 23).

Cranley’s opponents recently accused him of originally
supporting the streetcar when he was a council member through two 2008 City
Council motions, but Cranley says those motions,
which he co-sponsored, only asked the city administration to study the
merits of a streetcar plan, not approve of it. Cranley voted no on the
first streetcar resolution in October 2007 and the motion to actually
build the streetcar in April 2008.

“I’ve never said that I’m against the (streetcar) concept
in all circumstances,” Cranley says. “I wanted to know if there was a
way that they could pay for it in a way that wouldn’t take away from
what I thought were more important priorities.”

Ohio law has exception for wire-powered vehicles

A review of the fine print in Ohio law could spell trouble for
Duke Energy in its dispute with Cincinnati about who must pay to move utility
lines to accommodate the city’s streetcar project.

Readers of CityBeat’s
March 6 cover story know that one of the legal arguments made by Duke Energy is
that it said the system qualifies as a utility itself under Ohio law. And one
utility has no legal obligation to reimburse another utility, Duke added.

City officials disagree with Duke’s interpretation, and the two
sides currently are trying to negotiate a compromise to the impasse.

The city is willing to pay $6 million to relocate Duke’s natural gas, chilled water, fiber and electrical
infrastructure along the streetcar route, but the firm insists it will cost at
least $18.7 million and possibly more.

A close reading of the Ohio Revised Code (ORC), however, reveals
it is unlikely that a streetcar system qualifies as a “public utility.”

Under Ohio law, the following items are defined as public
utilities:

“A motor transportation company, when engaged in the
business of carrying and transporting persons or property or the business of
providing or furnishing such transportation service, for hire, in or by motor-propelled
vehicles of any kind, including trailers, for the public in general,
over any public street, road, or highway in this state.” ORC §4905.03

“(B) “Motor vehicle” means any vehicle, including mobile homes and recreational vehicles, that is propelled or drawn by power other
than muscular power or power collected from overhead electric trolley wires.
“Motor vehicle” does not include utility vehicles as defined in division (VV)
of this section, motorized bicycles, road rollers, traction engines, power
shovels, power cranes, and other equipment used in construction work and not
designed for or employed in general highway transportation, well-drilling
machinery, ditch-digging machinery, farm machinery, and trailers that are
designed and used exclusively to transport a boat between a place of storage
and a marina, or in and around a marina, when drawn or towed on a public road
or highway for a distance of no more than ten miles and at a speed of
twenty-five miles per hour or less.” ORC
§4501.01(B)

Streetcars operate using overhead trolley wires, thus they aren’t considered
motor vehicles under Ohio law. But do they even qualify as vehicles? The ORC
defines vehicles as:

“(A) “Vehicles” means everything on wheels or runners,
including motorized bicycles, but does
not mean electric personal assistive mobility devices, vehicles that are operated exclusively on
rails or tracks or from overhead electric trolley wires, and vehicles
that belong to any police department, municipal fire department, or volunteer
fire department, or that are used by such a department in the discharge of its
functions.” ORC §4501.01(A)

Of course, streetcars run on rails and use power from electric
trolley wires. So, they aren’t vehicles either.

The conclusion: Either “motor-propelled vehicles” mean the same as “motor
vehicles” (in which case it doesn’t apply to streetcars) or “motor-propelled”
is an adjective to “vehicle” (which also doesn’t apply, as streetcars aren’t
vehicles).

In each instance, a streetcar system doesn’t fall into the legal realm of a “motor transportation company” and therefore isn’t a “public utility.”

SORTA wants to limit transit fund, Mallory refuses

In the past few days, local media outlets have reported
heavily on a supposed conflict between Southwest Ohio Regional Transit
Authority (SORTA) and the city of Cincinnati. Essentially, SORTA wants
the transit fund limited, while the city government says it doesn’t want
to “undermine the city charter” with limitations.

At its heart, the argument is a political back-and-forth
with little consequence. It’s two government agencies at a small divide
over legalese in an intergovernmental agreement about how the streetcar
will operate and how it will be funded.

The specific issue is SORTA, which runs the Metro bus
system and will operate the streetcar, wants to include phrasing in its
agreement with the city that makes it so the transit fund can’t be used
for the streetcar. In a 7-6 vote Tuesday, SORTA's board pushed its preferred wording along with an application for an $11 million federal grant that will help fund the streetcar.

But the city government claims the limitation would go
against the spirit of the city charter, which says the transit fund can
be used for “public transit purposes generally and without limitation.”

UPDATE:City Council on Wednesday
passed a resolution promising not to use Metro bus money on the
streetcar, although it has no legal standing preventing council
from later coming back and using transit funds for the streetcar.

Still, Mayor Mark Mallory’s office has insisted time and
time again that funding for the streetcar’s construction and operation is already
allocated, so taking any money from the transit fund will be
unnecessary. Specifically, the city will tap into casino revenue to
operate the streetcar, on top of the $11 million federal grant.

In an op-ed for The Cincinnati Enquirer Monday, Mallory said
the real issue goes back to an ongoing lawsuit between SORTA and the
city. In 2010, the city diverted money from the transit fund to
pay for street lights. That prompted a lawsuit from SORTA, asking the courts to
define the limits of the transit fund.

The mayor’s office sees the wording from SORTA as an attempt from the transit agency to score a minor victory in the legal battle. If the city government accepted the wording, it
would be agreeing to a limited transit fund, which is essentially what
SORTA wants.

SORTA’s wording also makes it so all transit fund money
will continue going to the Metro bus system, which is the agency’s sole
service today.

But even SORTA says the disagreement is getting blown out of proportion by media outlets and public
officials. Sallie Hilvers, spokesperson for SORTA, says the wording in the approved agreement was the board’s attempt to ensure the transit fund
isn’t used for the streetcar, but, for the most part, it’s “really just
procedures.”

Hilvers insisted the disagreement over wording has plenty
of time to be worked out, and it will not hinder collaboration between
the city of Cincinnati and SORTA.

The agreement will need to be worked out before summer 2013 for the streetcar to stay on track.

City Manager's 2013 budget proposal must be approved by council, mayor

City Manager Milton Dohoney Jr. unveiled his 2013 budget plan at a press conference today. The proposal, which must be approved by City Council and
the mayor, seeks to close a $34 million deficit while avoiding major cuts
and layoffs. The proposed budget will only set the city’s course until
mid-June, when the city will transition into establishing budgets based
on fiscal years.

The biggest deficit plug will come from privatizing parking
services, which the city manager’s office says will bring in $40 million
in one-time revenue and additional revenue over 30 years as part of a
long-term contract. About $21 million of the initial lump-sum payment will be
used to close the 2013 budget deficit.

In the past, Councilman P.G. Sittenfeld voiced concerns
about privatizing parking: “I’ll await more details, but
it seems penny-wise and pound-foolish to forgo a steady revenue stream
for a lump-sum payment. Cincinnati needs a structurally balanced budget
and can’t keep relying on one-time sources. Places like Chicago and
Indianapolis have seen their parking rates more than double following
privatization — that’s a bad deal for citizens, and something we don’t
need while we’re experiencing an urban renaissance.”

Another concern is whether the city’s current parking
employees will be laid off if parking services are sold. Dohoney said
the deal for privatization will require the winning bidder to interview
all American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees
(AFSCME) workers. Full-time workers who do not join the winning bidder will be
hired in other parts of the city government. “No AFSCME employee will be
placed on the street if they are full-time as a result of this effort,”
Dohoney claimed.

The rest of the deficit plug will come in cuts, cost shifting, savings,
revenue, embedded growth and one-time sources. Among these, notable
items include the elimination of the Mounted Patrol for the Cincinnati Police
Department (CPD) and a $610,770 reduction in Human Services Funding. A few departments and programs, including the CPD, will face
further minor cuts.

The city manager’s office claims the changes in the budget
are necessary mostly due to changes at the state level. Specifically,
the state government cut the Local Government Fund by 50 percent and
eliminated the tangible personal property tax reimbursement and estate
tax; altogether, losing these sources of revenue cost Cincinnati $22.2
million in the 2013 budget.

Facing the large deficit, Dohoney said he wanted to avoid across-the-board cuts and
other major cuts to growth and investment programs: “You’re not competitive
if that’s your approach.”

The budget also includes some
spending increases. The Focus 52 Program will focus on redevelopment
projects in Cincinnati’s 52 neighborhoods. If it’s successful, the new
program will “grow the city’s revenue base, create new jobs and/or
increase the population of the city,” according to the city manager’s
office.

In other budget news, the city manager will also send out
the Tentative Tax Budget proposal, which sets the millage rate for the
operating property tax. That proposal seeks to raise the millage rate
from 5.9 mills to 6.1 mills, which will provide an estimated $31 million
in revenue, up from $23.5 million. For a $100,000 residential property,
that means a tax hike of $46.

City will lease Music Hall to private company for 75 years

Cincinnati’s Music Hall will be getting renovations, but
the project will be much smaller than anticipated. Instead of the
previously estimated $165 million, the project, which involves the city
leasing the iconic building to the Music Hall Revitalization Company (MHRC) for 75 years, will only
cover approximately $95 million.

At a joint press conference Wednesday, Mayor Mark Mallory
and Otto Budig, president of MHRC,
officially announced the plan, which City Council will take up early
next year.

Not many details or a timeline were announced at the press
conference, but some information did come to light. The renovations will
include more comfortable seating, extra restroom capacity, heating, air
conditioning, improved plumbing and new escalator models. During the renovations, Music Hall, home of the Cincinnati Symphony Orchestra, Cincinnati Opera and Cincinnati Ballet, will be closed for an estimated 17 months.

“We will do this in a manner that carries with it the
surety that the project will be complete,” Budig said. “The worst thing
we could do is start this project without the natural resources and
pledges available.”

On top of the leasing agreement, the city will also help fund the project through tax credits.

The lease continues the trend of public-private
partnerships city government has used to revitalize Over-the-Rhine and
downtown Cincinnati in recent years. From the Banks to Washington Park, the city of
Cincinnati has pushed to be seen as a more attractive, business-friendly
environment.

However, that has come with some push back. The Cincinnati
Center City Development Corporation (3CDC) and city have previously
faced criticisms from homeless advocates for allegedly discriminatory
rules at Washington Park, which were later voted down by the Cincinnati Park Board.

Some public officials have also raised concerns about the
city giving away too many of its public assets. The 2013 budget
currently relies on a proposal that will privatize Cincinnati’s parking
assets, a plan that has faced heavy criticism from Councilman P.G. Sittenfeld and mayoral candidate John Cranley. City Manager Milton Dohoney argues the privatization plan is necessary to avoid 344 layoffs.

Wording tries to skirt ODNR oversight

Nobody stood up for fracking in today's City Council
committee meeting that saw dozens of people urge council to pass an
ordinance banning injection wells within Cincinnati.

All members of the Strategic Growth Committee voted in
favor of the proposed ordinance, with the exception of Councilman Chris
Seelbach, who was recovering after allegedly being assaulted in downtown Monday night.

If approved, the ordinance would prohibit injections wells
— which inject wastewater underground — from being allowed within city
limits. It now goes before the full council.

The practice is commonly associated with hydraulic
fracturing – or “fracking” — which uses chemical-laced water to drill
for oil and gas. Fracking fluid injected underground has been tied to a
dozen earthquakes in northeastern Ohio.

A 2004 Ohio law puts regulation of oil and gas drilling
under the state’s purview, preventing municipalities from regulating the
drilling.

The wording of the proposed Cincinnati ordinance doesn’t
mention oil or gas drilling, which proponents say they hope will keep it
from clashing with the state law if it passes.

She says she isn’t sure if the proposed Cincinnati ordinance would conflict with the state law.

“It’s very hard for ODNR to speculate on what might
happen,” she says, adding that there aren’t any injection wells or
applications for them in the Cincinnati area. “This may not be an issue
that’s ever tested.”

That didn’t stop the dozens of people who spoke in favor
of the ordinance at the committee meeting from erupting into applause
once the ordinance was approved.

Barbara Wolf, a documentarian who has made a video about
Cincinnati’s Water Works, said that the city has some of the cleanest
water in the world, and chemicals from hydraulic fracturing could
jeopardize that.

“We are studied by other countries,” Wolf said. “If it
(fracking fluid) goes into the Ohio River, we don’t know what the
chemicals are. It’s very hard to clean up chemicals if you don’t know
what they are. And that’s one of the things we do really well: clean up
chemicals.”